The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The grounds of appeal are as follows: although the defendant did not commit an indecent act by force at the home of the victims in 2014, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts contrary to the rules of evidence, and therefore the judgment of the court below is erroneous.

However, the recognition of facts, the selection and evaluation of evidence is within the discretionary power of the fact-finding court unless it goes beyond the limit of free evaluation of evidence.

The judgment below

In light of the record, even if examining the reasoning of the judgment below, the recognition of the facts exceeded the limit of free evaluation of evidence.

shall not be deemed to exist.

In addition, pursuant to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for more than ten years is imposed, an appeal is permitted on the grounds of unfair sentencing. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the defendant, the argument that the sentence is too unreasonable is not a legitimate appeal.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.